Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Labor News: 2005 in Review

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
January 03, 2006

More than 500 leaders and officials of the seven Change to Win federation unions met Nov. 17-19 in Las Vegas to strategize how to work together in organizing campaigns. Organizers, researchers, and communicators from each of the seven unions met to discuss campaigns and strategy to grow the labor movement. This marked perhaps the first time since the founding of the CIO in the 1930s that so many union officials met to discuss joint targeting and strategy.

Since a card-check and neutrality agreement took effect earlier in 2005, the Communications Workers of America organized more than 11,000 Cingular Wireless employees at former AT&T Wireless facilities around the country. Under the agreement, which went into effect July 1 for all former wireless units, Cingular agreed not to oppose union organizing efforts, and to recognize the union in a particular area if a majority of workers signed authorization cards. SEIU Local 925 won a union election among 10,000 home-based child-care providers in Washington State. The American Arbitration Association, which presided over the voting, mailed representation ballots to all home-based child-care providers that are licensed and/or paid by the state. Of the 3633 secret ballots that were returned by mail, 92% voted in favor of union representation.

Wal-Mart Workers of America (WWOA), a new national association for current and former Wal-Mart Stores workers, will sponsor a clearinghouse to supply information and services to employees outside a traditional union framework, according to the founding group, so-called Wake Up Wal-Mart. WWOA members can tap into information to increase understanding of their employment rights. One of WWOA's services gives members an opportunity to qualify for subsidies that Wake Up Wal-Mart has raised for uninsured workers. Members also will have access to a toll-free helpline.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions Image

UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?